Gardner v. Bean
This text of 124 Mass. 347 (Gardner v. Bean) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The instruction to the jury was correct. The fact that the plaintiffs originally charged the goods to the agent, with whom they dealt, did not preclude them from resorting to the principal, when afterwards discovered. The statement, in their petition in bankruptcy against the agent, that he owed them this debt, was not conclusive against their right to maintain this action which they had already brought against the principal, and was rightly submitted to the jury, with all the evidence in the case. Raymond v. Crown & Eagle Mills, 2 Met 319. Exceptions overruled.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
124 Mass. 347, 1878 Mass. LEXIS 317, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gardner-v-bean-mass-1878.